"twit"

[Laurence Horn]

At 9:37 AM -0500 12/1/03, Kathleen E. Miller wrote:
>At 12:26 PM 11/29/2003 -0500, you wrote:
>>Is there any reason to suppose that "[silly] twit" has any etymological
>>relationship to the verb "twit" = "tease" (etc.)?
>>
>>My OED is apparently uncertain about the meaning of "twit" (sb1: 2),
>>recorded as "silly ... twit" from 1719 and 1896. Judging from the citations
>>as they stand, this could easily be continuous with the 20th-century use.
>>
>>One obvious speculation would place "twit" on the spectrum which also
>>includes "twitchet" and "twat", with all three having the same one-word
>>gloss. Relatively sparse printed record would be expected.
>>
>>-- Doug Wilson
>
>
>
>Several of the books I checked did say it was a blend of twerp and twat
>(Partridge for example.) And Safire brazenly and boldly had that in the
>column. ;-)  I told him, he writes for a paper that won't allow the word
>butt in its pages, but he thought he'd give it a shot anyway. Of course the
>editors were immediately "in a twit" about twat.
>
>
>Kathleen E. Miller
>Research Assistant to William Safire
>The New York Times.

too bad--he could have then gone into the whole bit from Webster 2 on
_twat_:  'some part of a nun's garb [erron. Browning]', one of the
more amusing lexicographic entries, right up there with _dord_

larry